Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

I suggest the following (the list is not intended to be exhaustive but something which might prompt further contributions). Note that I have REMOVED some observable evidence for an ancient Earth that young Earth creationists either ignore or explain away:

- much faster continental drift suggesting recent supercontinent break-up;- none of the varied evidence pointing to long periods of time when sea levels were much higher or much lower than today eg raised beaches or undersea peat;- only the Milky Way galaxy visible;- no supernovae ever witnessed;- only tiny polar icecaps;- a much faster speed of light perhaps;- many fewer fossils of extinct creatures discovered;- millions of fossils, and lots of igneous rock layers, all over the Earth which date as approximately 4,300 years' old by radiocarbon dating and other radiometric dating methods;- all extra-terrestrial meteorites that have been dated dating as less than 10,000 years' old.

I don't see why God could not have created such a universe. And one which would not have been so corrupted by original sin that it allowed the 'pagan religion' of 'millions of years' to take hold. After all, Romans 1 says creation testifies to the Christian God and that men and women are 'without excuse'.

The Francis Turretin blog which I linked to in another thread last night reads in full as follows:"In human terms, of course, the universe is old. It's thousands of years old, much older than any living human, and maybe two orders of magnitude older than a typical retiree. It's old. It is not, however, as old as people who adopt the presupposition of naturalism think it is.These days they are telling us that the universe is between 13-14 Billion years old. Even the Earth itself is between 4-5 Billion years old, they tell us. Perhaps, on the presupposition of naturalism, that's the "right" approximate age.That presupposition of naturalism, however, is wrong. The Earth only appears to be as old as naturalism would suggest it is.But why then does the Earth look so "old." Is God lying to us by dressing the world in old clothes to deceive us about its true age?First, God can hardly be accused of deceiving us about the world's age, when he gives us such detailed information in Genesis and Exodus that allows us to generate an approximate age of the universe.Second, what would a "young" universe look like? On naturalism, a 6000 year old universe would be one that is totally inhospitable to life - the same for a 6000 year old Earth. So, one obvious answer for the reason that the Earth and Universe don't look "young" is that the Earth and Universe are here to support life.Third, as David Gadbois has noted (see here) any conceivable universe that has the laws of conversation of mass and energy would look older than it is, because the existence of matter and/or energy would imply the indefinite past existence of matter and energy.Fourth, this "apparent age" is subjective. Sure, I know that "scientists" use various objective measures and perform calculations, but the notion of appearance is itself inherently subjective. We see this subjectivity in the "increasing age of the universe" phenomenon. Nineteenth century scientists evidently estimated the age of the world in the tens of millions to hundreds of millions of years range. By contrast, the age of the earth is now estimated to be the billions of years, range - with no real guarantee that new theories won't bring new revisions.In short, given propositional divine revelation, any appearance of age of the universe is hardly problematic. Moreover, since naturalism cannot account for fully formed worlds springing into being in a moment, it is unsurprising that the universe "appears" older than it is. When the universe had just been formed, every possible naturalistic judgment of the earth's age would necessarily suggest it was older than it actually is. That is especially the case for an habitable world, given that both new universes and new earths (as described by the scientific theories du jour) would be completely inhospitable to human life.-TurretinFan".

"...any conceivable universe that has the laws of conversation of mass and energy would look older than it is, because the existence of matter and/or energy would imply the indefinite past existence of matter and energy". I looked at the David Gadbois comment that is linked to here. It read "I would add that if one were to observe nearly *any* conceivable universe 5 seconds after the creation event (one that is ex nihilo), it would always “appear” to be older than 5 seconds. There is something when a few seconds ago there was nothing, yet there is no indication to the observer that that *something* wasn’t there minutes or hours ago. If that observer were to merely extrapolate the laws of conservation of mass and energy, one could not account for the recent creation event". EVEN IF the comments about the laws of conservation of mass and energy are correct, this rather looks like pseudo-science to me because it ASSUMES instant creation from nothing took place.

"... given propositional divine revelation, any appearance of age of the universe is hardly problematic. Moreover, since naturalism cannot account for fully formed worlds springing into being in a moment, it is unsurprising that the universe "appears" older than it is. When the universe had just been formed, every possible naturalistic judgment of the earth's age would necessarily suggest it was older than it actually is. That is especially the case for an habitable world, given that both new universes and new earths (as described by the scientific theories du jour) would be completely inhospitable to human life". Again, I think the keywords here are "given propositional divine revelation".

Why are we apparently seeing stars still being formed today (or perhaps that should be 'today') if the whole, if expanding, universe was created 'very good' during one week 6,000 years' ago?

YECs feel obliged to argue that stars are NO LONGER being created (they doubtless could not persuade anyone, except perhaps fellow YECs, that ALL of these stars and nebulae are 6,000 light years' away from Earth).

From the latest blog by YEC evangelist Dr Terry Mortenson - who is bothered about compromise in Christian colleges (blog dated 17.4.12):

"About 8–12 times per month I give a lecture in the museum for guests who want to hear it. On Saturday I gave one of my most common talks, “Is Genesis Relevant in Today’s World?” which explains mainly from Scripture why and how Genesis 1–11 is so foundational to the rest of the Bible and how evolution and millions of years assault the truth of Genesis and are at the root of the moral and spiritual collapse of the once-Christian West. Each time I speak, there are always interesting people to meet afterward. Many tell me how much they appreciate what AiG is doing to provide answers to the lies of evolution and millions of years and call the church back to the authority of the Word of God. Some have biblical or scientific questions, and I do my best to provide answers";

"... she told me of the very real possibility that she may actually lose her job because her school holds to theistic evolution and she is a young-earth creationist. The irony is that some of the theology, philosophy and history professors have accused her of naivety and not really understanding evolution. The arrogance and ignorance of these non-science professors is breath-taking. I encouraged her to be faithful to the Word and pointed her to some books and DVDs...";

"She said the students came back very confused because “there were so many nice and intelligent Christian scholars who have so many different views from the young-earth view.” I pointed out to Sue that this could actually teach these students a vitally important lesson, namely, that regardless of the position we take on this subject of origins and the meaning of Genesis, we cannot escape the very disheartening fact that some very good, nice, intelligent Christian people are seriously wrong. We simply can’t say that everyone who disagrees with us is wicked and ignorant and probably not saved. That would not be true to reality";

"When I say that old-earth creationists and theistic evolutionists are wrong and their views are undermining the authority of Scripture and the truth of the gospel, I am not saying that they are not Christians or that they don’t believe in the death and Resurrection of Jesus for their salvation, are not sincere, are not moral, don’t love their spouse, and don’t care about evangelism, missions, and the poor. I’m sure that most old-earthers and theistic evolutionists are Christians, do love Jesus, do live moral, upstanding lives, do have good marriages and care about the lost and suffering. But they are still wrong about the age of the earth and evolution and the proper interpretation of Genesis, just like Peter was a true believer in Jesus as the Messiah but wrong about the death and Resurrection of Jesus (Matthew 16:13–23), and just as he was an apostle mightily used by God but still succumbed to the fear of man and hypocrisy and undermined the gospel (Galatians 2:11–14). The views of old-earthers and theistic evolutionists simply will not stand up under careful scrutiny with an open Bible and when the assumptions driving evolutionary, old-earth interpretations of the scientific evidence are exposed. “Good Christians” can be seriously in error";

"Pray that God will keep the door open for her to continue to teach her students the truth of science and how to think critically and spot the faulty logic and erroneous assumptions used by evolutionists to promote ideas that undermine the Word and the gospel".

It would appear that Dr Mortenson believes in either censorship, intellectual bullying or deliberate attempted falsification of knowledge that is not gained from a 2,000 year old holy book. It appears that God requires a little 'help' from the closed-minded YEC community to ensure that his message to humanity can continue to be believed.

There's ANOTHER CMI YEC coming to the UK this Summer. Giving talks in churches entitled 'Cosmic Accident or Divine Design?' See the website, from which I've cut and pasted the following:

We are delighted to be hosting Dr Mark Harwood again, following his successful speaking tour in 2009. We do hope you’ll join us at one of his meetings this year.

Mark completed his formal education at the University of Sydney in 1978 where his postgraduate studies focused on radiotelescopes and computer techniques for antenna design and measurement. He played a key role in the development of the Australia’s national satellite system from its inception in 1980. Most recently, Mark led the design effort and the preparation of the business cases for the three Optus D-series satellites, launched in 2006, 2007 and 2009. Mark has now retired from Optus where he was General Manager, Strategy and Planning for the satellite business.

During his university years, Mark was something of a “closet Christian” because he could not understand the basis of his faith. He assumed that God must have created through the processes of evolution (theistic evolution), but that idea provided no meaningful basis for Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross. Later, he was confronted on the historical truth of Genesis and realised that the early chapters of Genesis were actually true and fundamental to the Christian faith. His subsequent journey of investigation convinced him of the theological and scientific basis of the Genesis account of creation.

Dr Harwood has been an active supporter of CMI in Australia for many years through the Sydney Support Group, which he has served as leader. Today, he speaks passionately about the relevance and the scientific integrity of the Genesis creation account, both in Australia and internationally, on behalf of Creation Ministries International.

Be challenged, get equipped!

As an experienced engineer, Mark knows design when he sees it, whether it is heavenly bodies ‘out there’ in the Cosmos or—at the other end of the size scale—life under the microscope. His dynamic and informative talks were greatly appreciated by British audiences who heard him four years ago and we trust you’ll be able to make it to one of these meetings. He’ll also be one of our speakers at the Carlisle Carrying the Creation Torch conference.

From CMI's Facebook page (I toyed with the idea of trying to get to this event but it wasn't very practical):

"David Catchpoole UK Tour got off to a great start with a conference at Chessington, Surrey with CMI speakers Philip Bell, and Dominic Statham as well as Vij Sodera and Brian Edwards. More than 300 people crammed into the venue for a full-day conference. David's tour continues this week. (Venues and times http://creation.com/evolution-myth-bust ... catchpoole) Photo is of all speakers during question time".

If I was Statham or Bell I might be feeling slightly miffed. Obviously this Catchpoole bloke must have 'star quality'.

David Catchpoole - Australian plant physiologist and CMI employee.Which reminds me: since the land was inundated sufficiently to kill all but resistant seeds like olives (which benefit from treatment with strong chemicals to get them to germinate), did Noah take a grass "kind" onto his ark? He'd not only need it to feed the herbivores (which all animals were then? Or was that only until the fall?) but to resow the earth ready for them to develop into everything from sheep's fescue to elephant grass and maize over the next couple of thousand years.

a_haworthroberts wrote:There's ANOTHER CMI YEC coming to the UK this Summer. Giving talks in churches entitled 'Cosmic Accident or Divine Design?' See the website, from which I've cut and pasted the following:

We are delighted to be hosting Dr Mark Harwood again, following his successful speaking tour in 2009. We do hope you’ll join us at one of his meetings this year.

Mark completed his formal education at the University of Sydney in 1978 where his postgraduate studies focused on radiotelescopes and computer techniques for antenna design and measurement. He played a key role in the development of the Australia’s national satellite system from its inception in 1980. Most recently, Mark led the design effort and the preparation of the business cases for the three Optus D-series satellites, launched in 2006, 2007 and 2009. Mark has now retired from Optus where he was General Manager, Strategy and Planning for the satellite business.

)

Optus is a satellite operator. It neither designs nor manufactures them, not even its own satellites. He certainly managed the Optus D specification and procurement process but that is not the same as design. I've never, in 30 years, heard of a commercial communications satellite operator which designed its own satellites. There are just a handful of satellite manufacturers capable of designing commercial communications satellites.

a_haworthroberts wrote:There's ANOTHER CMI YEC coming to the UK this Summer. Giving talks in churches entitled 'Cosmic Accident or Divine Design?' See the website, from which I've cut and pasted the following:

We are delighted to be hosting Dr Mark Harwood again, following his successful speaking tour in 2009. We do hope you’ll join us at one of his meetings this year.

Mark completed his formal education at the University of Sydney in 1978 where his postgraduate studies focused on radiotelescopes and computer techniques for antenna design and measurement. He played a key role in the development of the Australia’s national satellite system from its inception in 1980. Most recently, Mark led the design effort and the preparation of the business cases for the three Optus D-series satellites, launched in 2006, 2007 and 2009. Mark has now retired from Optus where he was General Manager, Strategy and Planning for the satellite business.

)

Optus is a satellite operator. It neither designs nor manufactures hem, not even its own satellites. He certainly managed the Optus D specification and procurement process but that is not the same as design. I've never, in 30 years, heard of a commercial communications satellite operator which designed its own satellites. There are just a handful of satellite manufacturers capable of designing commercial communications satellites.

Tas Walker has an alternative email address with the suffix @optusnet.com.au.

Brian Jordan wrote:David Catchpoole - Australian plant physiologist and CMI employee.Which reminds me: since the land was inundated sufficiently to kill all but resistant seeds like olives (which benefit from treatment with strong chemicals to get them to germinate), did Noah take a grass "kind" onto his ark? He'd not only need it to feed the herbivores (which all animals were then? Or was that only until the fall?) but to resow the earth ready for them to develop into everything from sheep's fescue to elephant grass and maize over the next couple of thousand years.

I don't know the answer to Brian's question but it occurs to me that the Olympic Torch Relay is a very good analogy for the Bible-inspired young creation apologetics ministry known as 'creation science'.

The torch will be following an extremely circuitous route across the UK since starting out on its journey at Land's End. But its intended final destination in late July is without a shadow of a doubt.

Brian Jordan wrote:David Catchpoole - Australian plant physiologist and CMI employee.Which reminds me: since the land was inundated sufficiently to kill all but resistant seeds like olives (which benefit from treatment with strong chemicals to get them to germinate), did Noah take a grass "kind" onto his ark? He'd not only need it to feed the herbivores (which all animals were then? Or was that only until the fall?) but to resow the earth ready for them to develop into everything from sheep's fescue to elephant grass and maize over the next couple of thousand years.

I don't know the answer to Brian's question but it occurs to me that the Olympic Torch Relay is a very good analogy for the Bible-inspired young creation apologetics ministry known as 'creation science'.

The torch will be following an extremely circuitous route across the UK since starting out on its journey at Land's End. But its intended final destination in late July is without a shadow of a doubt.

Perhaps only if you get bunch of people claim that the torch relay started on the 20th July, but still managed to complete the extremely circuitous circuit of the UK in that time span, and will swear blind that the time stamps on all the TV footage are wrong or faked and that we fell into a white hole.

'If I can shoot rabbits then I can shoot fascists'Miners against fascism.Hywel Francis

The torch will be following an extremely circuitous route across the UK since starting out on its journey at Land's End. But its intended final destination in late July is without a shadow of a doubt

And on it's way back it'll be going past the end of my road. And thats literally, so i'll be cheering it on! I'll check the date as I wave and make sure its concordant with the stated date but as a evilutionist obviously I'll be deliberately interpreting it differently to spread satanism in some strange way.

And Redditch seems to have hosted a proper cycle race as well today, got there to watch and found itv 4 cameras all over the place . We are getting famous for more than Jackie Smiths son watching naughty films on expenses. Was very exciting tho hadn't a clue what it was.

He'd not only need it to feed the herbivores (which all animals were then? Or was that only until the fall?)

If you can bear to listen to Marcs talk on the global flood they were all herbivores - including t rex.